Bans from AmiRight are extraordinarily rare: in my three years here, I know of only five such bans: three of serial plagiarists, a parodist named "George", and the most recent one of Linda (for other reasons)

Rather than post my remaining thoughts here, I figured I'd start a topic on the boards, where it won't be lost to permanent obscurity.

"John J and Robert: I, too, am disappointed that it had to come down to a ban, same as I was when it happened on this messageboard. However, I'm more disappointed that Linda learned nothing from the board ban and continued, for almost another year, to do the same things here that earned her a ban from the messageboard.

John: As a website editor, I don't have the luxury of ignoring comments: part of my voluntary job there is reading them all.

Robert: You missed quite a bit: do some searching here (as well as the comments on AmiRight) and you'll find it. Either of you (or anyone else) can send me a PM if you'd like more information.

Unlike this messageboard, I cannot selectively edit comment content there: they either stay in entirety or are removed. Since there is no 'middle ground', I almost always let comments stay up, even those that are factually wrong, and most times even personal attacks. Even if I could selectively edit posts, there is no way I'd want to do it.

"Attack" comments on AmiRight have been explicity against the rules for some time now, the same way that attack parodies are not allowed.

It is a priveledge to be able to post on this free site, not a right. Censorship doesn't apply here: would it be censorship if you sent the NY Times the Unobomber's Manifesto (or even the Bible) every day and they refused to publish it? Is it censorship that some chose to not allow comments under their parodies? No and No are my answers.

There's pathetically few rules that one has to follow to be able to stay here: that Linda has been banned should speak for itself.

Phil: I lost patience with Linda quite a while back. I tolerated her slams toward other authors for far too long."

~~~~~~~~~~

For those that may think me a hardass, please note that the majority (close to all) authors on AmiRight are not aware that I can edit comments, because most of you (like, 99+% of those reading this) have never posted a comment that needed to be edited or deleted. There's plenty of things said that I don't agree with, but I don't remove content based on that, rather by the rules.

To be clear, those rules are:

No Decade complaints
No Profanity
No Spam
No Personal Attacks
No Posting entire articles/stories from outside sources

Really simple, eh? Yet Linda has repeated violated the 4th rule almost since she has been on the site, nearly two and a half years.

I'm well aware that others have attacked Linda, but given that she wanted to dish it out I figured she could also take it. In the past, a few comments directed toward her were removed.

I don't see another ban of this nature happening anytime soon on Amiright. Differing viewpoints are always welcome: constant flaming and trolling are not, hence why we won't be seeing anymore of Linda.

Ant

Red - thanks for the reply.

When you have a moment, could you please email me the posts (that I missed) which caused Linda to be banned?  Look - and I know that you know this - I'm not challenging anyone on free speech and guidelines.  I just get nervous when expression might possibly be subjected to suppression - and I'm not saying it is here.  However, I just want to be sure that we're not banning any writer for their opinions - their speech (despite how wrong she is).  I also want to be sure that my comments did not play a role in her banishment - or I request that they be taken down. 

Oh, and thanks again for your nice comments on "Johnny"
bob

I have to be 100% honest here in saying that I am not in the least surprised or shocked by this.  She has posted such hateful comments towards anything in which she disagrees with.  I, as a general rule, don't read her parodies--and I don't vote on them as doing so would be very biased as I strongly disagree with a lot of her views (for the record I am an Independent politically).  It's awfully hard however for me to ignore her novel long comments all over the latest comments page or the reply comments which are often just as long.  I've personally seen her use excessive name calling, insult beliefs in a way that was demeaning and inflammatory, and refer to individuals in horrible light in comments where the individual wasn't even involved.  The only thing I'm slightly surprised by, is that some people are shocked it happened.  I gave up on reasoning almost immediately upon reading one of her parodies, her arguments aren't based on fact but rather hypocritical insults and baseless rhetoric that more than just getting old, hurts.  I won't go into details, but even though I personally have never been talked about by Linda (at least not directly) I have been seriously hurt by some of her words.  I have only been around for a little over a year here, and I have to say I haven't read anything by anyone else as hateful as some of the regular posts by her.

Lol, shows how awake I was this morning as i thought the subject was BANDS from AmiRight, not BANS!

Anyway, regarding the subject of Linda, I don't know what to say really, but she always gets into a war with Michael Pacholek every time a parody by her is posted.

Regarding abusive comments from other authors on AmIRight, im aware someone named Jonathan S. did leave a few attacking comments, but I am pleased to see that he has changed his ways and is quite a decent person. Shame Linda couldn't follow suit.

Also just out of curiosity, has there ever been a case when someone has been un-banned due to mitigating circumstances?

Jason.

Red - thanks for the reply.

When you have a moment, could you please email me the posts (that I missed) which caused Linda to be banned?  Look - and I know that you know this - I'm not challenging anyone on free speech and guidelines.  I just get nervous when expression might possibly be subjected to suppression - and I'm not saying it is here.  However, I just want to be sure that we're not banning any writer for their opinions - their speech (despite how wrong she is).  I also want to be sure that my comments did not play a role in her banishment - or I request that they be taken down. 



I know we don't save deleted comments in the software, with the volume of spam we used to get before the security images were put in place, it would have filled the site if we had.  Not sure if Red Ant saved any to show me later just in case.

What Linda has posted could be construed as opinion.  Much like saying I think George W. Bush is Hitler re-incarnated is an opinion. Is it really necessary for a music humor site to be filled with comments like that?  There are plenty of sites where you're free to make statements that are borderline slander, I don't want amIright to be one of them.

We let her continue on as long as we did because we don't want to be seen as a site where only one political view is expressed.  It's just the manner in which she expressed her opinions was too hate filled and borderline slander to allow it to continue.  When one person is responsible for 90% of the volume of complaints on the site, you have to step in and do something.

I know we don't save deleted comments in the software, with the volume of spam we used to get before the security images were put in place, it would have filled the site if we had.  Not sure if Red Ant saved any to show me later just in case.

What Linda has posted could be construed as opinion.  Much like saying I think George W. Bush is Hitler re-incarnated is an opinion. Is it really necessary for a music humor site to be filled with comments like that?  There are plenty of sites where you're free to make statements that are borderline slander, I don't want amIright to be one of them.

We let her continue on as long as we did because we don't want to be seen as a site where only one political view is expressed.  It's just the manner in which she expressed her opinions was too hate filled and borderline slander to allow it to continue.  When one person is responsible for 90% of the volume of complaints on the site, you have to step in and do something.



Gentlemen - thanks - I understand.  Too bad as her passion could stimulate intelligent debate and result in expanding creativity.  However, the rhetoric by both sides has just been singing the same old song.  But I'm as guilty as she is so if there's any way of allowing her back - count me in.
Thanks again.
bob

Gentlemen - thanks - I understand.  Too bad as her passion could stimulate intelligent debate and result in expanding creativity.  However, the rhetoric by both sides has just been singing the same old song.  But I'm as guilty as she is so if there's any way of allowing her back - count me in.
Thanks again.
bob


I wouldn't mind seeing Linda back in, if she PROMISES never, ever to make a single attack comment again. Some of her non-political parodies were quite enjoyable. At the end of the day its up to ChuckyG and Red Ant whether Linda gets reinstated or not.

Jason.

Bob, Chucky: I did not save the comments of hers I removed. There were three, one on the parody I linked to above and two on another recent one of hers. They really weren't any different than her typical comments, which is to say they were broad, sweeping attacks.

I saw Linda's comments posted early this morning - I have not removed them. I also did as she requested and removed her last name from the posts on this thread. It really is amazing what one can accomplish if one is nice about it. . .

If there's not enough evidence left over in the comments of her 60-some parodies to show a longstanding pattern of attack comments, then there's not much else I can do.

Then there is the trolling: here's an example of it:

http://www.amiright.com/parody/70s/nationallampoon1.shtml

There are many more cases of Linda doing this, though I do not have the URLs handy.

While her ban here is related in reason to her ban on AmiRight, they are considered seperate sites, which is why Linda was not banned from AmiRight a year ago.

Her parody content is not why she was banned. Her viewpoints are not why she was banned. Her often character limit reaching multiple posts was not why she banned. She was banned because she often attacked other authors in the nastiest ways she could think of, even those who have had no interaction whatsoever with her. Prime example:

"...and his parodies that do not try to be funny, are slapped together, redundant and many have inaccurate information and some even hateful. or, better stilll, tell it to Malcolm Higgins who has posted 2057 parodies, the most here, and all that I can see, are juvenile, un-funny, some vile in nature, attacking and in many cases - propaganda truth - i.e., filled with lies and deception and completely un-funny."

Funny... Malcolm has written many parodies making fun of the left. Even those right of center with their political ideology routinely got shredded by Linda. I'm not going to repost the 3 full length comments she typed in response to Guy: you can see them here.

To all that want Linda back: To what end? The only ways I can see to curtail all of the mudslinging under her parodies is to disable comments for them or not allow her to post political parodies... or I can continue removing attack comments from now on. Not really good solutions, are they?

I don't foresee Linda being allowed back any time soon, but if Chucky decides to have her back, I will accept his decision.

In the meantime, Linda is still free to submit parodies to whatfreaks.

Ant

Thanks again - I was just curious.  Could she come back if we all adhered to a more issue and fact based discussion with respect to comments on "political parodies"? 

I am completely divorced from what has gone on here, I never go into the parodies, but the examples here seem to put Linda in a much better light than whoever wrote that Condi/Aunt Jemima parody.  I, as an African American democrat who cannot stand the sight, of her or Clarence Thomas, found the parody seriously offensive.

Thanks again - I was just curious.  Could she come back if we all adhered to a more issue and fact based discussion with respect to comments on "political parodies"? 


I agree with you there.

Jason.

Holy crap!  :D  That woman is loony.

I must admit, I was a lot happier reading a Linda T parody than anything by TSB, poomaster or George Hamlinton IV.

Now don't get me wrong, im not condoning Linda's bad attitude, but her handful of 'kinder' (non-political/attacking) posts was quite a good read for me.

Jason.

Well, Jason, respectfully--I read a number that really hurt me.  Her posts today as "linkis" (sp?) was a lot more reminiscent of a respectful person with different view points than hers. . .if she was like that regularly I personally probably wouldn't have the opinions I do about her.

We all know your opinion of TSB Jason, you've made that well known, my only problem with TSB is when he has blatant plagiaries. . .outside of that--we all have our own brand of humor and while I may not generally find his stuff funny--some people may. . .The Lousy Haircut thing Matty and I found last week ticked me off though--you don't plagiarize parodies--ESPECIALLY Weird Al--and at least in that respect--Linda isn't a plagiarist
but she posted hurtful attacks and that isn't allowed here Jason, they have to follow their guidelines, now maybe that she has been banned -she can start practicing what she said as "linkis" or whatever, if she does good for her, she'll be a better person. . .I can agree to disagree with general opinions as I do with Guy DiRito, Merry & Pippin, John Jenkins and even some of Michael Pacholek's more extreme works. . .as long as I am respected I can respect back even if we differ in opinion, you can't (or at least couldn't) do that with Linda. . .I hope her exit posts were real and if somehow she talks her way back on here, I hope she lives by what she posted, and I probably wouldn't have as much built up distaste.

Poomaster--well--I was one of the few who stood up for him, even though some of his parodies were very disgusting, but they generally didn't violate rules, I can't say I'm sorry to see him go though--obsessive to the point of having a poo fetish--I didn't enjoy his work, but I did defend his right to post those things. . .and got attacked in the process by Johnny, (not to be confused with Johnny D who has never posted anything against me) who has since become a fan, and I have more respect for him now than I did at first.

George Hamilton is banned from AmIRight for his horribly incomplete nonsensical parodies.  Red Ant filled me in on some of his work from the past, turning "Dust in the Wind" into a 37 verse song, it takes an uncharted amount of 'talent' to write something that off . . . So I'll agree on that comparison

I really think, Jason, that with TSB/Poomaster, you simply shouldn't bother reading work that you know isn't up to a higher standard--it would help your own writing.  TSB and Poomaster are not among the inthe00s competitive group and are not likely to improve your skill as a writer, comparing yourself to them is not something I'd strive for. . .Instead I love it when someone compares me, even in remote light, to Weird Al, Kristof Robertson--or even better when I see someone compare someone else's write to me. . .that feels good, you won't get those type of comparisons by focusing on TSB and Poomaster, neither have any aspirations with writing or goals. . .instead you should focus more on those you can learn something from or those on an equal playing field with you. 

I take the time to listen and pace each entry in each contest I enter, doing so has improved my writing a lot, despite the fact that I have been writing since I was ~8 years old. . .Tommy Turtle, Stuart, Kristof, Red Ant, Matthias, Peter Anderson, Phil Alexander, Arwen and many other regulars are the works I focused on, and their work helped teach me little things here and there I can improve upon--I think you should consider doing the same.

Between those authors, my editing, my edginess, my willingness to take on a difficult song and my brand of humor have all expanded. . .even in recording (which at the time non of those people were regular recording artists) my work benefited from reading seasoned veterans work.  Even better is that in addition to learning, I was able to help share my own talents with them and we had a mutual benefit, that won't happen with TSB. . .or Poomaster

Hope you take this only as intended, as advice Jason
Sincerely,
Dave

Yea thats pretty cool Dave. I understand what you are saying.

I have never been a plagarist and have no intention whatsoever of plagarising someone else's works. If I wanted to include a reference to another person's parody in my own, I would ask the author of the intended parody first.

I'll tell you what did hurt me slightly, that parody by Anonymous Parodist - I Won't Kiss A**. S/he was accusing the regular authors as being 'elitist snobs' and I was quite taken aback by that, since I am one of the more regular authors, I felt that I was also being called an elitist snob. I did leave a helpful comment aimed at AP so s/he could write parody worthy of comments. Instead AP just went on to whinge and whine about not getting votes/comments on his/her parodies. I must admit, I have a suspicion of who AP might be, but I am not going to name anybody on the off chance that I am wrong and creating bad feeling.

Indeed I appreciate the helpful feedback Ive had from Kristof Robertson, Stuart McArthur, Red Ant and yourself which has enabled me to write much better than my earlier works. In fact, Ive been writing more parodies because of this. Im still aiming high for the SOTM contests.

About Linda, I understood that she did write some really insulting comments, but I never got involved as I didn't want to be caught in the crossfire. Thats why I ignored her bad comments and only read her few good ones. She did write the odd non-political parody that wasn't too bad

Regarding poomaster's work, i admit that if I realised that his parodies contain toilet humour, I shouldn't have read them. So therefore I am not going to argue there. However with TSB, I have REALLY TRIED HARD before to leave positive feedback on the odd good parodies he writes. But guess what? He never ever responded to ANY of the comments I have writted for him. And I don't like the way that he enjoys attacking other people in his parodies. He has written attack parodies about Alvin Rhodes (on the Whatfreaks site), the RnB singer Rihanna and of course, he has plagarised Weird Al quite a lot. Why he hasn't been warned about plagarism remains a mystery to me. And of course George Hamlinton IV is best left unmentioned.

Anyway once again thanks for your response Dave. I can't be on AmiRight as often as I like, due to my job, but whenever I do write a parody, I try to make it as good as possible. I know I have submitted a couple of seriously cocked-up parodies, which were '99 Cold Blocks Of Ice In My Bed' (I still can't understand why I wrote that) and 'Lets Shake Hands With Sir Michael Pacholek' where I got the pronunciation of 'Pacholek' totally wrong. But I feel I have learnt from them and I have written some pretty neat parodies recently.

Best Regards Dave.

Jason

Yeah, I remember AP. . .and the parody you are referring to. . .we all have suspicions as to who that was, but as you said--some things are best left unsaid, especially without any of us knowing for sure.  Whoever it was, (s)he was wrong about those people anyway, at the time I was still fairly new around here--but this cast has never made me feel like there are kings and the rest of us are just here for their amusement, so I agree with that opinion about AP.  Plagiarism will always be a mystery to me, as this is a free site, what would possess someone to even want to steal one's work and claim it as their own on a non-profit site. . .but alas the fact that I haven't done it is probably why I don't understand it. . .pity really. ah well-all is well:)

Yea thabks for that Dave. Im just typing this on my Blackberry to make sure it works.

Jason.

Onto the next page of history...good job, Chucky, Red, and good vibes from all regarding this hemorrhoid in our collective tuchus.
Karma to everyone on this thread. (Pagliaro, if you weren't a Guest, you'd get one too)

Hey Agrim - I'll take that instant karma now.
bob

Hey Agrim - I'll take that instant karma now.
bob


Hehe...done...you shoulda signed on a long time ago.  ;)

I had a password but I forgot what it was so I applied for a new one in case I have the opportunity to cast a vote to unban Linda.

I had a password but I forgot what it was so I applied for a new one in case I have the opportunity to cast a vote to unban Linda.


I have karmaed you to, I am building the historic SOTM websites, so though I hardly know you, I've read much of your excellent work.

Well thanks B.A.D. (although I don't know about excellent - I'll bet you say that to all the authors).

Allow me to introduce myself - I'm bob.

Dude, recently did a search and found my stuff on your site - thanks man, I appreciate it.  Haven't had the chance to explore the site but I'll take a look.

SOTM - haha - maybe someday I can enter a worthy piece.  A piece credited to my last dog, Kimba, actually placed third once - really makes an owner proud.
Later
bob

My comments on this sad episode:

1. This is a private web site. We are allowed to post at the pleasure of the site's owner.

2. As stated before, the site has simple rules. One of them was not to attack fellow parodists/posters. This rule was not followed by LT. She was apparently warned, disregarded the warnings, and was banned. This was the right thing to do in the proper order. Ample time was given for her to be in compliance, and Red Ant deserves kudos for how he handled this situation.

3. I have run active online forums for Popular Photography magazine's web site, and during that experience I learned that it only takes one or two people who refuse to follow the rules by insulting other members of the community to chase away good people who bring intelligence and creativity to the discussion, and then it takes a lot of effort to rebuild traffic and enthusiasm.

4. If someone's been banned, that's it. A vocal handful will question your decision, but generally they don't know the entire story or appreciate the effort and sleepless nights that went into the decision. Besides, they must respect the wishes of the owner (see point #1). Don't let the banned members back or it will get a lot worse. Trust me...I've been there!

OK, I'm done. Now, back to my "27 Jennifers" project... ;-)

Cheers,
Mason

I know that Drmusic has been added to the list of bans, as well as all of his cronies (who are probably all just him/it/troll under various pen names). Thank you, admins.

Should we add "Poli-Tick-Ly Incorrect" for banishment as well? All of his parodies seem to be border-line libel that bash and slander the Democrets to the third degree. And when people tell him how bad his paroides are, he goes out and harshly accuses his commenters of bullying, threatening, and doing whatnot, when he's the one calling the kettle black. If you look at his comment threads, you'll see that most people disagree with his content anyway. I'd ban him. He seems worse than a mash-up of Lindie Terhune and K>Y>L>E.

Just out of curiosity was Green Blooded Hound Dogs banned? And if so, why?

Should we add "Poli-Tick-Ly Incorrect" for banishment as well? All of his parodies seem to be border-line libel that bash and slander the Democrets to the third degree. And when people tell him how bad his paroides are, he goes out and harshly accuses his commenters of bullying, threatening, and doing whatnot, when he's the one calling the kettle black. If you look at his comment threads, you'll see that most people disagree with his content anyway. I'd ban him. He seems worse than a mash-up of Lindie Terhune and K>Y>L>E.


No. William Tong has been writing the same about Bush for years. I knew as soon as a democrat got in office, we'd see a reversal of that. Parodies may be (and have been) removed, but PI has done nothing deserving of a ban.


Just out of curiosity was Green Blooded Hound Dogs banned?

To my knowledge, no.

Ant

No. William Tong has been writing the same about Bush for years. I knew as soon as a democrat got in office, we'd see a reversal of that. Parodies may be (and have been) removed, but PI has done nothing deserving of a ban.

To my knowledge, no.

Ant

I see. Yes, Will Tong was completely anti-Bush for the entire time the man was in office (even before the '00 election, lol), but he expressed his anti-Bush opinion in a fair tone; AND he didn't enable comments on his parodies.

Poli, on the other hand, seems completely bitter and condescending in most of his works. He never says anything kind about anybody, and when someone disagrees with him, he makes fun of that person. (For example, he'll say something along the lines of, "I can see how uneducated you are...") His overall tone sounds almost completely like Lindie Terhune.

No. William Tong has been writing the same about Bush for years. I knew as soon as a democrat got in office, we'd see a reversal of that. Parodies may be (and have been) removed, but PI has done nothing deserving of a ban.

To my knowledge, no.

Ant


My thing on PI is when he goes into attack mode (*or she since we aren't one hundred percent sure) (s)he or it's croonies are going to far, blatantly attacking which is precisely what Linda got banned for, thus far I wouldn't go so far as to ban either, but to say 'nothing deserving of a ban', buddy, have you read his comments?  He also has had a couple of parodies I would consider to be racist, but like I said, at this point I'd say not yet a ban, but most certainly rules have been broken, I've had several comments reported that were by PI or PI pseudonyms.